<p>Thanks, idad, for responding patiently and thoughtfully in spite of the fact that I and another were making fun. I meant what I said, and yet I agree with you. I’ve encountered individuals who seem primarily driven by their anger or, more accurately, their indignation, sometimes to the point of inviting ridicule, but that’s not to say that their fields aren’t legitimate academic endeavors.</p>
<p>The Duke article was an eye-opener, and I’ll bet the discussion was eye-opening to the participants. Sometimes you just don’t realize that things are offensive until it is pointed out to you.</p>
<p>But we are certainly getting off the original topic, aren’t we?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No, I see noticeable differences between some institutions. What I find laughable is that someone who has never actually been taught by, nor spent any time with faculty at two different institutions, would so authoritatively claim some apparent differences from reading a magazine. Oh and give advice to someone about where to spend four years at college on that basis!</p>
<p>oh. so just baylor and duke are equal. of course that must be right. because you’ve been to baylor and you’ve been to duke and you do some sort of work there and therefore you declare them equal. baylor profs are just as good as duke profs. a 1 to 1 match. so is this a unique oddity or will you find harvard pros equal to baylor as well.</p>
<p>look, what you’re saying is just not true.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Do you have any objective evidence of your assertion? Your assertion really doesn’t carry any weight without evidence.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Uh yeah it is. Based on my experience, as well as my knowledge of my colleagues as well-- all three set of faculty who yes, can say there is not even a REASON for a difference, let alone coudl they state what such differences between these two sets of faculty would be.</p>
<p>I currently oversee a professional association of almost 20,000 faculty members. I have sat on AASCB and several other faculty review boards. I’ve been a faculty member for 20 years at four different universities, including an Ivy, a state, a top 10.I teach in three continents and at four different levles. I’ve worked with more faculty than I can count. And as part of my profession, I visit many universities in a given year. I’ve published in teaching journals, and written a text book that is widely used in my field.</p>
<p>But what the heck would I know, I’m sure you have far better reasons to be right than me. And so tell us, the basis of your deep insight is…??</p>
<p>Whoa! Looking forward to hearing from p8. As my D would say, “burn!!!”</p>
<p>Perhaps I should stay out of this quarrel, but is everyone talking about the same “Baylor” here? </p>
<p>Baylor University in Waco?
Baylor College of Medicine in Houston?</p>
<p>again, you’re arguing that people are equal…all the same in ability and performance. that profs at baylor can be switched with the profs at duke and the quality of teaching is the same. </p>
<p>from research to publishing to teaching abilities to IQ the profs at baylor are identical to the profs at duke, really? i don’t have evidence to prove this is true but it just doesn’t seem logical…it’s not how things work…better schools, teams, and companies have higher performing teachers, coaches, and executives…isn’t that obvious!</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Better schools may or may not have higher performing teachers. There’s a lot of disagreement to what constitutes better schools but let’s use standardized test scores. One real problem that administrators and teachers have with these tests is where you have one student that moves into the district that isn’t prepared. Or you have a group move in and your school then fails adequate yearly progress. The teachers are the same but the students aren’t.</p>
<p>Coaches are important but I think that Phil Jackson had a better time of it with multiple superstars and a supporting cast. Would Phil Jackson have had so many championships without Jordan, Pippin, Shaq and Kobe?</p>
<p>Companies can do well with or without good executives. Sometimes the products are so compelling that they sell themselves. Sometimes, it’s luck and timing. Sometimes it’s location, location, location. Sometimes it’s timing. Sometimes it’s cheating. Worldcom and Enron were sky-high for a while until they were caught cheating. Sometimes it is marketing too. Sometimes it’s using slave labor to reduce costs.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Like non-tenure-track junior faculty?</p>
<p>
If the recent economic crisis has taught me anything, it is that executives tend to be self-perpetuating oxymorons.</p>
<p>S. Jobs excluded, but he is unusual given his creative talent.</p>
<p>excellent execs, great coaches, and top profs attract good employees, talented athletes, and high performing students.</p>
<p>and all the well managed companies are making it through this recession fine, such as top execs Steve J, Larry E, Bill G, Warren B, and John C, not to mention the new billionaire on the block Marc B. interestingly: no college, some state college, some Harvard, Columbia grad, Stanford grad, and USC grad, in that order. All ambitious as hell!</p>
<p>duke has better profs that’s why they attract higher performing students, this is reality 101. please:)</p>
<p>^My best “professor” at Duke was my grad student TA who taught my recitation section in fresman English – he went on to eventually become the editor in chief of Fortune Magazine. Some of my other professors at Duke were great teachers and some of them should never have been unleashed on the classroom. It’s not necessarily a case of getting what you pay for – many faculty members at elite institutions are there because of their research credentials, not because they are stars at the lectern.</p>
<p>^^so do you think baylor in waco is equal to duke in the quality of it’s profs (and TA’s)?? or might there be a bit of a difference?</p>
<p>^I haven’t attended any classes at Baylor, so I can’t really answer your question. In general terms, however, I do not believe that the quality of instruction at an elite university is necessarily any better overall than it is at a third tier university. I do agree, however, that the facilities and the academic caliber of the student body at an elite institution would be superior to their counterparts at a third tier. My own experience with the quality of instruction at Duke was mixed – I had a few great professors, a few terrible professors and most were unremarkable and fell somewhere in the middle. My daughter would tell you that the quality of instruction that she has received at Kansas State has been uniformly excellent, but she would also tell you that she chooses her classes very carefully and screens her prospective instructors with websites like ratemyprofessors.com.</p>
<p>Kelllybkk - I have worked at some pretty high end establishments and know a lot of very successful folks - including highly placed folks at NASA, Harvard, and a former governor. A very small number of them have every judged anyone based on where they got their undergrad degree. Most of them judge people on their merits.</p>
<p>^^agree</p>
<p>although I got the feeling Kelly was talking more about how the person felt inside about themselves, not so much what others thought.</p>
<p>I do think as you go west it’s more about what you can do than your school brand or family name. There was a hilarious oped piece in the Boston paper that talked about a kid from Boston getting a reference letter from a business leader/family friend in Boston, sent to a prospective employer in California. The letter said the kid was from this family and went to that prep school, and attended so and sos classes at Harvard. The prospective employer wrote back, “I don’t want to breed him, I just want to know if he can do the job!”</p>
<p>imo: that’s why so much innovation comes from California, it’s all about performance out here:)</p>
<p>OP, I would like to thank you for posting your happily-ever-after ending. My S will be going to a state school that is not our flagship to study in a program for which this particular school is well known in our state. The school itself is a definite “unknown,” but its graduates account for more than half the professionals in S’s chosen field in our state. S feels a bit let down attending this school, since he got into “cooler” schools. However, from a financial standpoint, there is simply no justification to spend more for another school. I showed him the numbers, and he realizes that this is his best choice.</p>
<p>I feel very comfortable, after visiting the school & sitting in on professor-student panel sessions, that this school will be very good for my S. He will get everything he needs, and he will get everything he wants if he is motivated to go the extra mile. The school prides itself on its professional connections in the field, and S could get work experience targeted to his specific interests (which are a bit a-typical for “most” students interested in this field). In other words, he will get a great education at a very reasonable cost.</p>
<p>Once he graduates, he will be free to move around the country (with all apologies to SWA for stealing their tagline!) … debt-free, no less.</p>
<p>Not sure what to think about this post. There is absolutely no question that one can do just fine while going to State U, whatever tier. I did–I was a middle class kid, zero help from parents, went to State U and State U law school. Professor at State U law school knew federal judge and got me a clerkship coming out of law school, federal judge knew partner at big, prestiguous NYC law firm and got me a job there. I ended up working at one of the probably the top ten law firms in the country for a few years. I am now at a much smaller firm in another state, but have done very well–make a good living, raised a family, will be able to pay for my kid’s college and retire at a reasonable age. But to argue that my anectdotal experience, or anyone else’s, somehow proves a rule that one is just as well off going to tier 3 school over, e.g., HYP is just not supportable. There was a lot of luck involved in where I ended up–professor with a friend who happened to be a judge really liked me and got me a job I would not have gotten based on credentials, including where I went to school, without that relationship; judge with a friend who happened to be a partner at a big firm and really liked me got me a job I would have had no chance at without that relationship. The judge had never hired a kid from State U law school before me, only from Ivies and near Ivies. After the department at the law firm I worked at had decided to hire me, I had to go through an obligatory interview with the hiring partner, who said to me “they have decided they want to hire you, and I can’t change that at this point, but we don’t hire people from State U.” The firm generally only hires people from top 20ish law schools. Those top 20ish law schools are full of people from top 20ish undergraduate programs. Again, one can do just fine going to any school if one is motivated and works hard, and one can have a fine life going to almost any school. But to suggest that where one goes to school does not impact one’s opportunities is just not true.</p>